Then have a look at this joke that they try to pass off as a serious article at Newsweek by of all people, the guy that once pretended to be a conservative, “Mad Andy Sullivan”. Mad Andy basically says Obama critics are dumb. Pointing out that the campaigner in chief isn’t as smart as the sycophants want us to believe makes us dumb? Damn Andy, that is too funny! You attention whore, you!

Look, I could waste a whole lot of time actually using logic and facts to debunk this nonsense, tearing all these people in the LSM a new asshole while I am at it, but since they feel no such obligation to do anything of the sort themselves and simply resort to name calling and denigrating the people they hate, I think tat would simply be a waste of time. It is far more effective to just stoop to their level and point out how stupid they are for thinking that calling those of us that see Obama for the empty suit he is dumb, will score them big points. Maybe stories like this are gobbled up by the rabid leftists that think they are smarter than the “Fox News” crowd they also consider dumb for not gobbling up the leftist spoon fed propaganda and nonsense that is passed off as news, but they basically show us both how desperate and detached from reality the sycophants in the LSM and the people that believe the shit they put out, are.

I get it: Obama is a genius. That’s why he is a marxist, nanny-stater, big government should pick winners and losers, centralized planning, food-stamp expanding, tyrant wanna-be that believes the American dream should force everyone to cross the finish line at the same time instead of giving people the freedom to succeed or fail. His kind of genius always plays out the same way though. Everyone is left living in misery. And that outcome is not an accident, but the guaranteed end result if you let “geniuses” like Obama do what they want. And we are the dumb ones for pointing that out.

Comments are closed.

Oddly enough, there is absolutely zero evidence to support any declaration of Obama being a genius. People have looked for it, and people have taken great pains to ensure that things like academic records are unavailable. Based on what you can see that isn’t scripted, he appears to fall at least 20 to 30 IQ points short of the qualification.

I wrote off Sullivan years ago when he latched on to his own Trig Palin conspiracy that he continues to this day. Even before that I couldn’t figure out why people listened to him – he’s barely better than Kos.

You didn’t, um, read the article did you? “using logic and facts to debunk this nonsense” would be more interesting than another primal scream. He brings in the Left for a bashing for their ceaseless whining. I think Sully’s wrong about a lot of things in the article — he praises Obama or letting healthcare lobbyists write the PPACA and cites some frankly bogus deficit figures. But I think he’s right that Obama isn’t as bad as Bush (admittadly a low bar). And with this quote:

That’s why he is a marxist, nanny-stater, big government should pick winners and losers, centralized planning, food-stamp expanding, tyrant wanna-be that believes the American dream should force everyone to cross the finish line at the same time instead of giving people the freedom to succeed or fail.

Writing yet another post that the LSM is still googoo over Obama and the left is like saying water is wet, birds fly, and we are taxed enough already.

I don’t read Sullivan. He, like David Brooks and Arrianna Huffington discovered a long time ago that it is more lucrative (sell more books and get invited to the Maher Show more often) to change sides, don’t matter to me. And I expected if any post to be written on Sulivan, Hal would do it, but I know he would read the piece first, then comment on it’s contents.

I could waste a whole lot of time actually using logic and facts to debunk this nonsense

I would prefer that, at least it saves your reader the gruesome task of having to do it himself.

he appears to fall at least 20 to 30 IQ points short of the qualification.

How did you come up with that figure? I guess it is a good a guess as any, but given the concerted (and successful) attempt to cloud his past, to envelope him under a mystery shroud, him and his record, I think I would give him a 50 point spread between what can be proven and reality. He very well could be a genius, but 90ish is also a possibility. Regurgitating words written by others does not a genius make, otherwise Sean Penn, Matt Damon, and George Clooney would be standing beside him on his genius pedestal.

Compare number of wars started, number of bin Lades killed, amount of debt racked up, total job creation numbers, rate of increase in non-defense discretionary spending, rate of increase in all spending, constitutional violations, number of people tortured — Obama is better, although he’s likely to eventually eclipse Bush on deficits. And that’s without handicapping for the situation they came into.

Look, I’m not going to defend Obama’s record, which is … at best … crappy. But I do think any analysis of his presidency has to account for the incredibly massive shit sandwich he was handed — two endless wars, Al Qaeda active, a 9% (!!) 2008 Q4 drop in GDP, employment cratering. Yeah, I know. It’s all the Democrats’ fault. Nothing is every the fault of the Party of Personal Responsibility. It was Barney Frank’s mind control rays that made George Bush burn more political capital fighting gay marriage than fighting the marriage between Congress and the Big Banks.

I think Sully bends over backward to sugarcoat everything Obama has done. But I do get annoyed at the talking points that emerge from the GOP about how Obama is a Kenyan, America-hating, socialist muslim atheist dumbass evil genius. They spew so many vile talking points that are complete rubbish (e.g., the “apology tour”) that I can barely listen to them.

There are very legitimate criticisms of Obama. But you won’ find the Republicans making them because they pretty much hold the same views.

1) He has hamstrung the recovery by adding Dodd-Frank to Sarbanes-Oxley. Yes, I know the liberals are saying regulations aren’t a problem because a slim plurality of business owners say slack demand is their biggest problem. But there are now more IPOs outside this country than in. There are thousands of regulations that have not yet been written. How can this not be having an effect? You won’t hear the GOP talk about this because their mitts were all over Sarbanes-Oxley, the bigger problem.

2) PPACA empowers insurance companies and shrank out the consumer. Sullivan again claims his will lower the debt, even though the Administration is already acknowledging this won’t happen (and never would have). But again: Obamacare is modled on Romneycare and ideas Newt Gingrich and Heritage supported. A Republican President would have done something very similar.

3) Obama’s record on civil liberties is simply appalling. He has tried to give the govt the ability to lie in response to FOIA requests. He’s codified indefinite detention. He is either ramping up the war on legal pot or has lost control of his own justice department. He argued against the ministerial exemption. But again, the GOP is, if anything, worse (Ron Paul excepted).

4) His budget approach has been a disaster. His failure to embrace Simpson-Bowles will be the spectre that haunts his presidency. But the GOP are still talking about cutting taxes, raising defense spending and somehow balancing the budget. This is not a serious group off guys.

Until the GOP starts hitting him on those points, they are still just shouting out talk radio lines that rile up crowds but won’t win elections and won’t lead to any changes in policy. So, yes, they are dumb.

Look, I’m not going to defend Obama’s record, which is … at best … crappy. But I do think any analysis of his presidency has to account for the incredibly massive shit sandwich he was handed

I agree. Times oft did justify a guy like Bush, no thanks at all to Euros, as ever, but the US was completely trashed by 2008, soaked in urine and caked in feces, basically treated like a generic youtube channel kept by idly rich frat house idiots just out to have some fun. They cashed in some of their stocks and went on Carnival Cruises and into rehab.”Piss on it hahahha!”

How the HELL do you come up with that, Hal? Bush’s BIGGEST defecit (before “Stimulus 1″ was ~450 billion. These socialists are projecting 1.4+ trillion defecits as far as we can see. Are you that dim/gullible?

As for the wars: 9/11. Also bHo has gotten us into a few new scraps and escalated the one Bush had managed to control. I just don’t get your aplogetic liberal views…….

Control? Cmon. Bush could be counted on to whip Islam’s revenge on the US’ cowboy ways into another typical worldwide frenzy. Sure enough. It took the US ten years to kill – some say murder – all of 3 “faces of evil” – Gaddafi, Bin Laden and Hussein. Peace and love, hearts and minds, Islamist influence and sympathy – its far worse everywhere. The 3 hits have and are going to continue to cost the US staggering amounts of money.
Obama almost promised me free health care, which has yet to happen. Theres no money left, thanks mostly to Bush

Well CM, I have read numerous screeds by Sullivan on the whole Trig Palin “scandal” that pretty much make that link of yours a complete lie.

That established, why read the rants of a known liar?

Well if it’s a lie then it’s a lie. I’ll go looking myself and see what I can find. It would be utterly stupid for him to claim something that it’s demonstrably false.

Well, CM, I did read his little article of idiocy – are you defending it? “Cause if you are, then you’re as much of a crackpot as Sullivan is.

No I’m not defending anything. As usual I like to see intelligent criticism and rebuttal on the detail (and this is happening, and Sullivan is continuing to provide the criticism and his rebuttal on his blog). As opposed to lazy dismissals (or defences) of the entire thing, often by people who clearly didn’t even bother reading it. Which is what both Hal and Sullivan himself were referring to.

What specific aspects of the piece did you have an issue with (it should go without saying, but by asking that question I’m not attempting to defend anything)? Do you disagree with the central premise that Obama is playing a long-game?

How the HELL do you come up with that, Hal? Bush’s BIGGEST defecit (before “Stimulus 1″ was ~450 billion. These socialists are projecting 1.4+ trillion defecits as far as we can see. Are you that dim/gullible?

2009 was a Bush budget. You leave out stimulus and he added $5 trillion in deficit spending .. While the economy was supposedly booming. He also put in the structures – tax cuts, wars, Medicare part d – that are part of the current shortfall. That having been said, Obama will probably eclIpse him within the next year or two. As I said, Obama’s failure to lead on the budget is his biggest failure. i

Megyn Kelly has declared that I am “not a real journalist.” She has also just said that I have written that Trig is not Sarah Palin’s child. As longtime readers well know, I took great pains never to state that and merely to ask Palin, given her insane story about the birth of her child, to provide some evidence for it, which she said she would but never did. The Beast has asked for a correction. Real journalists do not tell untruths on air without correcting them.

The one point I will concede I made too glibly is the CBO projected cost of Obamacare. The CBO did indeed score it as a net positive for the deficit. But there are many serious arguments that it won’t in the long run. Much depends on how it evolves, how well the market exchanges work, the power of IPAB, etc. But it remains a modest, centrist reform. I actually believe that getting rid of free-riders in an already-socialized system is a good, conservative idea, as once did Gingrich and Romney. So sue me.

(The entry by Sullivan also has the Bush/Obama new-spending cost-comparison chart (Bush $5.07 trillion, Obama $1.44 trillion). No doubt a book could be written suggesting it’s inaccurate, and another book could be written rebutting it.)

EDIT: An update from Sullivan: “Megyn Kelly’s producer says he is looking into having me on to defend myself and my essay. I’ll keep you posted.”

Dave D, Please ignore Hal’s Freudian slips, after all he’s assured us all he is absolutely not a liberal, no matter what he writes. Hell he my give you an entire laundry list of right wing positions. (he probably has it saved to his hard drive, you ain’t the first to mention his Dr. Strangelove like reactions)

It is fun though to watch him justify his faux pas tho.

Oh and Hal,

2009 was a Bush budget. You leave out stimulus and he added $5 trillion in deficit spending ..

Who wrote that budget? And which party controlled the Senate at the time? And why hasn’t the Senate approved a federal budget since 2009?

Who wrote that budget? And which party controlled the Senate at the time? And why hasn’t the Senate approved a federal budget since 2009?

ABSOFREAKINLUTELY. Also, that 2009 budget included what? ~800 billion in stimulus that was UNVETOABLE. What choice did Dubyah have in the massive giveaway of 2009? Also, bHo has managed to add 5 trillion in his FIRST THREE YEARS! Hal is living a fantasy.

No, Obama isn’t a radical Kenyan anti-colonialist. But he is a lawbreaker and an advocate of radical executive power. What precedent could be more radical than insisting that the executive is empowered to draw up a kill list of American citizens in secret, without telling anyone what names are on it, or the legal justification for it, or even that it exists? What if Newt Gingrich inherits that power?

…

“Under Obama, support for marriage equality and marijuana legalization has crested to record levels,” Sullivan writes. Yes, but no thanks to Obama, who opposes both marriage equality and marijuana legalization! This is the height of illegitimate Obama apologia: attributing to his credit policies he hasn’t advanced because a change in public opinion happens to have coincided with his tenure. By this logic Bush also deserves credit for the increasing support for gay marriage during the aughts.

Hal: Those WEREN’T 1.5 trillion dolar defecit years, right? You still fail to see the slope of the current bHo liberal spending spree that dwarfs any previous 8 year span. Is it because evil Bush tortured those poor prinsoners, or what? You simply can’t compare the disaster of this presidency to Bush’s.

Well hang on there. I hear the criticism of Hal’s position, but I also see some merit to comparing Obama and Bush unfavorably. Bush (as in he and his team) set in motion – or perhaps accelerated the motion of – a sequence that has resulted in less for the people and more for the corporation. OWS is stupid, but that basic tenet, that corporations have too much control and are being given more and more by our government rings so very true. Cronyism, “compassionate conservatism” (i.e. spend and spend), executive power grabs, those were hallmarks of Bush’s terms. And *if* you hold the view that EIT was torture, then morally the man was a disaster for you.

Now…Obama seems intent on ignoring the Constitution to a large degree, and economically he and his team could not be worse. Nothing he has done which is positive can be attributed to *him* or his staff. Bin laden wasn’t an Obama success, it was a SEALs success. Some say in spite of him.

Which is worse? I don’t know. Bush’s neocon cabal created a fucking disaster. They really, really were in it for the money/power. Obama’s lack of leadership skill and his team’s inability to grasp economics have exponentially increased that disaster, all while IMHO violating both the letter and the spirit of the foundations of this nation. They seem to be in it strictly for the power, and Congress is picking up the “in it for the money” slack.

Again during this conversation I am reminded of Lee, warning us all that maybe Bush wasn’t evil, but when he made a power grab, we needed to worry about what the next guy was gonna do with that power. Now we see the next guy. And we’re fucked, because no one ever voluntarily relinquishes power once it has been taken.

I’m coming to believe that it rarely matters which of our parties is in power. We get fucked either way.

Yup. All goddamned day, like it was our job to take cocks in every hole we have.

Actually Hal, I tridged through half of it before I simply gave up on that nonsense. I stand by what I wrote: it was bullshit writ large to make people like you and CM, whose nose is firmly planted in Obama’s ass, feel good while denigrating those that point out how shitty it must be to defend this guy.

But I think he’s right that Obama isn’t as bad as Bush (admittadly a low bar).

And I think you are about as stupid as that douche Sullivan is, if you believe that. Fuck, Obama makes Bush look like a genius, and considering how much I dislike about Bush, that is saying something. While Clinton was the proverbial used car salesman, they didn’t call him slick Willy for nothing, he at least gave you something for all that grease and slime. Obama is a fucking snake oil salesman, and what he is peddling is more likely to kill you than anything else. He takes credit for other people’s work and blames everyone else for the shit he breaks. He is making Carter look good.

Look, I’m not going to defend Obama’s record, which is … at best … crappy. But I do think any analysis of his presidency has to account for the incredibly massive shit sandwich he was handed

Yeah really? And when does it become his fault? Like I said. This imbecile takes credit for the good others do and blames everyone but what he has done for the bad.

— two endless wars,

I guess the 3 “kinetic Actions” Obama added, because he sure as hell didn’t stop either conflicts he so disliked when he ran as the “I am not Bush” candidate, escape your fucking mind? Or are the only bad wars the ones Bush started? And if you believe we pulled out of Iraq or are drawing down in Afghanistan on a time table that was not already put together under Bush then you are woefully uninformed. Shit, Obama even managed to have drones kill US citizens, which you used to get real mad about when Bush proposed to do the same, but you managed to do nothing but put up some token complaints against Obama for doing.

That sort of war thing?

Al Qaeda active

Not sure I understand this. What are you saying? Are you saying that Obama, whom inherited the policies that annihilated al Qaeda in Iraq and now has to deal with an organization that is barely effective, is responsible for us hearing less about what al Qaeda is up to from the LSM? Maybe it is because he is now their “friend”, like he wants to desperately be with Ahmadinejad?

Dumb.

a 9% (!!) 2008 Q4 drop in GDP, employment cratering.

You must have missed that trillion dollar stimulus plus the massive growth in entitlement spending to the tune of $880 billion more dollars each year that kept employment under 8% and poverty from climbing….

Yeah, I know. It’s all the Democrats’ fault.

Even if one was to pretend that we didn’t have an economic collapse because the social engineers decided to defy the laws of economics in an attempt to force lenders to throw pearls at swine, don’t you think the ridiculous policies of the last 3 years and all the extra debt we are going to be straddled with because of the massive growth of the nanny state, should be factored in even a bit? The democrats have been running the show for the last 3 years, and even they, despite the desperate few that hope to cash in on it again in the coming election, realize that that lump of shit has reached its expiration date.

Besides, I too could use this fucking lame logic and then argue Bush was handed a shitty hand. If 9/11 had not happened he would not have had to start those endless wars. And if he had balls and had just nuked those fuckers into the stone age the wars would not have to be endless! Hey this shit is fun.

Nothing is every the fault of the Party of Personal Responsibility.

WTF does this have to do with Obama being a fucking bigger loser than Bush? Is this more of your personal sour grapes faux conservatism showing? It has to be.

It was Barney Frank’s mind control rays that made George Bush burn more political capital fighting gay marriage than fighting the marriage between Congress and the Big Banks.

What a fucking lame attempt, even for you, to equate two totally unconnected events, using this kind of childish simplistic and utterly false language, in order to pretend the guy that believes the bullshit that has destroyed our economy isn’t as bad as the guy before him. Last I remember BTW, Obama is even more adamantly anti-gay than Bush is.

When Bush, amongst many others, pointed out that the house of cards the government enforced regulation to make lenders give money to bad risk people was going to break, he was shut down by Frank and the other dickwads in congress or the LSM that all believed like Franks does, from the party you pretend shouldn’t bear the fault for this issue, with accusations of being a racist. Back then that was a debate killer. At least I thank Obama for changing that.

Team Obama has doubled down on those policies. And whatever changes happened to benefit gays under the Obama administration happened DESPITE Obama. But you can keep pretending.

The rest of you shit reminds me of Sullivan’s usual drivel, so I am not even gonna bother. BTW, thanks for proving exactly what I said about Sullivan and people like you and him think makes you and Obama so much more clever and better.

Well hang on there. I hear the criticism of Hal’s position, but I also see some merit to comparing Obama and Bush unfavorably. Bush (as in he and his team) set in motion – or perhaps accelerated the motion of – a sequence that has resulted in less for the people and more for the corporation. OWS is stupid, but that basic tenet, that corporations have too much control and are being given more and more by our government rings so very true

SOME corporations… SOME. That’s the key. And the corporations/organization getting this power are getting it because SOME politicians are easier to buy than others.